International Marketing Case 2-3 Starnes - Brenner Machine Tool Company: To Bribe or Not to Bribe?
             In Case 2-3, Frank described two different bribes that took place while doing business in Latino. Because these bribes took place under unrelated circumstances, and because the contexts of the bribes were completely unalike, their ethical nature cannot be weighed equally. The first bribe induced by the jefe (a government official of Latino), required the American company to pay $1,200 per machine to be "adjusted locally" to correct defects. If Starnes-Brenner did not pay the bribe, the sale would not be completed. This could probably be classified as extortion because Frank was indirectly "threatened" by the jefe to pay the bribe if he wanted to make a sale. This would probably not be classified as subornation because Frank was not trying to entice the jefe to take action, but rather the jefe was threatening Frank to pay if he did not want the order to be cancelled. Because the amount of money at stake ($1,200) per machine was so large, this could not be considered lubrication. Lubrication usually involves a small amount of cash or a small gift given to an official to assist normal operations.
             The second bribe, on the other hand, could be classified as lubrication. Frank gave the dock boss a small amount of money to speed the process of unloading the machines at the border. The dock boss did not threaten Frank at all, therefore it was not extortion. Also, this situation would not be considered subornation because subornation generally involves large amounts of money.
             Under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, the first bribe involving the $1,200 per machine would be considered illegal. The FCPA makes it illegal to bribe a foreign government official to obtain or maintain business (http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/fraud/fcpa/dojdocb.htm, 2002)...